Do you blame Bush?

[PrincessFiona]

Honest question here...regardless of your party affiliation...Do you feel that president Bush's policies (economic and otherwise) helped contribute to the pain in the market that we are currently experiencing or do you think he had nothing to do with it?

[Rapunzel]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I'm leaning toward thinking he didn't have much to do with it. It seems like markets are bigger than election cycles. But like I said in the other thread, I have no idea what I'm talking about.

What do YOU think, Kris?

I tend to agree with this reasoning.

Therefore, I voted "No".

[JaneDoe]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I voted that I don't know. I think he is one of the worst presidents ever! I think he has created/failed to respond to alot of problems; however, I'm not so sure he is to blame for the financial meltdown. Before I go off and blame Bush, though, I want to know more about this mess.

From what little I understand, I believe that some of the mess originates during the Greenspan years and with Clinton. I think Clinton, despite all of his personal faults, was a great president. But, I do believe the legislation he signed into law relating to banking and the mortgage industry probably probably played a role in our financial meltdown. He was on the "The View" yesterday, and he even conceded as much. Although, he went on to say that Congress played a role too.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

What do YOU think, Kris?

I don't know. I wonder about Bush's leadership as president since the market meldown didn't just fall out of the sky. It was a known entity for awhile...did he hope to get through the presidency and hand over the crisis to someone else but it exploded in his face early? :huh:

I would argue that running up large trade deficits...and..domestic deficits (Iraq *cough, cough*) have not helped us at all. It also seems like there has been a totally hands-off handling of regulating the financial sector. The Fed has had to cut interest rates multiple times....some people got little incentive checks..we were told to get out and spend our money...but beyond that, I don't really see where he stepped up as a leader to really try and get a handle on the problem. Am I missing something?

The other piece to that puzzle though is that we have had do-nothing, limp noodle dems running the congress...and what did THEY do to step up and help? Clinton's policies also may play a role...but the demise of the banking industry didn't happen overnight...and...we could all see and feel that there was a housing bubble coming...it seemed obvious to us that offering massive loans to people with a high credit risk wasn't a good idea...You don't need a degree in economics to realize that people earning 50k can't afford 400k homes. :huh:

Really, my opinion is pretty weak here, but I think that part of the president's job is to provide leadership before a crisis hits...and he didn't....Also, this deal currently proposed has apparently been in the works for awhile now...Congress is just supposed to "look it over".

If our president wasn't in the "know" about this stuff before now...why not? Why did we wait until all of the companies started collapsing before taking action? What was our President doing? Our Congress?

I think it's complicated...but I do think Bush has some culpability here.

[SuzySunshine]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I voted I don't know but I suppose it should be more of a yes but not much. The reason I say that is even if Bush would have been able to come up with legislation years ago that he thought would solve a looming problem who's to say it would have passed? :huh:

That is part of our problem in this country. We will fight for the next 42 days about who we should elect President of this country but how much direct control do they REALLY have? Don't get me wrong, I know they have a lot in some areas (like military and foreign relations) but particular issues seem to just be so partisan and lobbyists have SO much control over things. Look at Clinton, he spent his first term cleaning up the financial mess we were already in, the tax cuts he promised were mute. His administration is the one that repealed the law which allowed these banks to get into the trouble they're in now.

No one person is going to be able to solve this just like no one person is responsible. The parties need to quit the crap and work together to get this country turned around because if we elect a democratic president and have a republican congress or vice versa its not going to matter at all.

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I agree with Tara.

I wouldn't say that Bush is solely responsible by any stretch. Like someone else said, market changes have more feeding into them than just the president. However, we are tacking on this huge $700 billion sum to already huge and ballooning deficit which is additional cause for concern (how are other countries going to view t-bills? how do we pay for this?). Bush has a role in that deficit because of the Iraq war and the no new taxes and cuts and new spending that has been happening for the last few years.

I also agree about the no golden parachutes but leaving salary alone. If executives don't take it, I think shareholders should hunt them down and burn them at the stake. The lack of oversight for Paulson is worrisome because its not like he has proven himself to really be on top of this or responsive. I think time is of the essence -- the world is waiting -- but not at the expense of having the right details in place.

[DCJenn]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

It's worth them taking an extra few minutes to parse this out, don't you think?

And as much as I'd love to blame this on Bush, I think he was far to wrapped up in the Iraq crap to even pay attention (which is I guess a backwards way of blaming him for crappy management)

I do think that Paulson and Berneke AND Greenspan all attempted to downplay the severity of the situation.

Jenn

and, I guess I'm going to be owning a second home in DC for a mighty long time. That goodness it hasn't lost more value than what we owe on it.

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I have no idea what the right amount of time is. I picture this going on for weeks and more and more stuff and $$$ getting tacked on. I guess that is more of my concern. But yes, absolutely they need to get the details in order.

[Vanquisher]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I like to blame everything on Bush. It is supposed to rain later this week. Who's to blame? That's right.

In all seriousness, yes, I do think he holds some culpability here. He is the most (gulp) powerful (gulp) man in the free world, and his economic policies and trickle down economic voodoo crap does place some of this squarely on his shoulders. It is not all his fault, or even a large percentage his fault, but I like to blame him anyway.

This is how I think of Bush. An incompetent boob who "taxes" the poor people while the rich get richer.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

Interesting read, Tara. Thanks.

So...I'm curious...why wouldn't you support income caps for these guys? What if we bail them out with 700 billion plus and then they just go right back to paying themselves multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses. Would you be ok with that?

[Sheherezade]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

Here's my problem with the "stockholders should set the tone" business. I want to get it out and answered right now while it is on my mind. Maybe someone will have an answer. I've been lead to believe that the majority stockholders in almost every company these days are mutual funds. The mutual fund investments (held by these investment banks and firms we are now bailing out) is so much higher than that of individual stockholders that they control the vote on all these things. Individual stockholders -- those people that might want lower corporate salaries and such - have little influence with their small portion of the vote. So....if it is bankers and investment fund managers (also paid a bajillion dollars) deciding about the culture on the Street, how will they ever change it? How can we set the tone and not them?

[SuzySunshine]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

Angie, you're right. DH and I own two different individual stocks. Every year we get the annual report in the mail with a ballot to vote on board members - THAT is the only say the average shareholder gets. I'm not sure leaving anything up to the shareholders is going to change much.

Re: Do you blame Bush?

I can't think of any examples off the top of my head but I think some of the big pensions (like California state employee) have pulled weight as shareholders. I think it is harder to impossible to make a difference as a small shareholder. There has to be something better than the government setting those limits though (IMO).

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Do you blame Bush?

Well, dh (who voted for HRC in the primaries but is now solidly in McCain camp...is he a PUMA ) swears up and down that Clintons' policies made it easier for these bad loans to be pushed through....he blames Clinton as much as he blames Congress and Bush.

Ummm...not that we're debating what our spouses think...but I'm bored..i'm procrastinating and...I've had german beer.

kris

Re: Do you blame Bush?

mmmm...beer

Wait...which Clinton? Or both?